Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttps://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uytj20Youth Theatre JournalISSN: 0892-9092 (Print) 1948-4798 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uytj20Examining External Influences in Young Children’sExplorations Within SociodramaDeanna Marie Pecaski McLennanTo cite this article: Deanna Marie Pecaski McLennan (2010) Examining External Influences inYoung Children’s Explorations Within Sociodrama, Youth Theatre Journal, 24:2, 160-176, DOI:10.1080/08929092.2010.518481To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08929092.2010.518481Published online: 21 Oct 2010.Submit your article to this journalArticle views: 586View related articlesYouth Theatre Journal, 24:160–176, 2010Copyright © American Alliance for Theatre and EducationISSN: 0892-9092 print / 1948-4798 onlineDOI: 10.1080/08929092.2010.518481Examining External Influences in Young Children’sExplorations Within SociodramaDEANNA MARIE PECASKI MCLENNANIndependent Scholar, Amherstburg, Ontario, CanadaSociodrama is a tool of dramatic exploration, which engages participants within an aesthetic, three-dimensional problem-solving process to examine, explore, and reflect uponissues of personal and collective importance. Using twelve sociodrama workshops,eleven students (six males and five females) from one senior kindergarten classroomwere encouraged to create and reflect upon common social issues and concerns asa classroom community through warm-ups, sociodramatic activities, and oral groupreflections. Using modified activities inspired by the works of both Moreno (1943) andBoal (1985, 1995, 1998, 2002, 2006), students discovered that they held the power tomodify their own responses and behaviors in specific social situations. Although sociodrama naturally exists as a spontaneous, realistic learning activity where participantshave power and control over their experiences, it appeared in this study as thoughinfluences beyond the students’ control including the school environment, the classroom teacher, and the students themselves may have influenced and limited the shapeand scope of the dramatic explorations.Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bringabout conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by whichmen and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how toparticipate in the transformation of their world. (Shaull 2003, 34)I was first introduced to the philosophies and techniques of sociodrama (Boal 1985,1995, 1998, 2002, 2006; Moreno 1943) during a course on the social uses of drama inmy first year of a drama in education degree. Since that time, I have been fascinated withhow this form of participatory drama might be used in educational settings to help promotesocial change and personal empowerment among students. In particular, as an early yearseducator, I was extremely interested in whether sociodrama might be incorporated into akindergarten classroom for use with children five and six years of age as a catalyst for theexploration and resolution of child-centered issues of importance. I wondered whether thesociodrama could be used to provide these young children with opportunities to engagein authentic, collaborative, and democratic experiences that would provide freedom forthem to explore personal and collective problems. In this article, I will discuss a researchproject I conducted to explore the effects of young children’s frequent engagements withinAddress correspondence to Deanna Marie Pecaski McLennan. E-mail: dramaqueenbee@yahoo.ca160Influences in Children’s Sociodrama Explorations 161sociodrama and the impact of three external influences—the school environment, the classroom teacher, and the students themselves—on student spontaneity and response within thesociodrama workshops (Pecaski McLennan, 2007).Educational SociodramaSociodrama was first conceptualized by Moreno (1943) in response to the social and political turmoil he experienced working with children and refugees following World War I. Hebelieved that each person regardless of his or her situation had the potential to creativelyexplore and express him or herself. Moreno envisioned sociodrama to be a group actionmethod, which allowed participants an outlet to dramatize social situations and issues ofpersonal and collective importance while discovering alternative ways of coping with orresolving these problems. This empowered people by using dramatic techniques as a catalyst for the identification and exploration of current social issues (Marineau 1989). Unlikemore traditional theatre activities that engage artists in the creation of a final performanceor product, sociodrama immerses participants within the process of aesthetic explorationthrough specific dramatic exercises and activities. Sociodrama has evolved greatly sincefirst being introduced by Moreno. It has been used extensively by multiple societal groupsto examine, explore, resolve, and reflect upon a wealth of diverse social issues (Griecoand Chambliss 2001; Hutt 2001; Rohd 1999; Sime and Lee 1998; Sprague 1998; Stein,Ingersoll, and Treadwell 1995; Trzinski and Higgins 2001). Over time, the use and evolution of sociodrama in such diverse contexts has resulted in a lack of a universally accepteddefinition or description of pure sociodrama. For the purposes of this study, I have definedmodern educational sociodrama as “an experiential group-as-a-whole procedure for socialexploration and inter-group conflict transformation” (Kellermann 1998, 181). Additionally,Wiener (1997) and Sprague (1998) have described sociodrama as a social learning activitythat has three primary aims, including: “. . . an improved understanding of a social situation, an increase in participants’ knowledge about their own and other people’s roles inrelation to that situation, [and] an emotional release or catharsis as people express theirfeelings about the subject” (Wiener 1997, 106–07).This interactive form of drama uses warm-up activities, games, main drama activities,and reflection to help evoke discussions, explorations, and the role-playing of preventionsor solutions to the issues being explored by the participants. In this study, the sociodramaticprocess consisted of: participation in the selection of a group theme or issue to explore inthe activities; enactment of role-play, games, or drama exercises; the reenactment of solutions to the role-play, games, or drama exercises; active audience participation as spectatorsincluding active listening; responding and participating in the drama; and active oral reflection in group discussions. This process empowered the students in the study through theircollective discussion, exploration, and resolution of many of the concerns that had beenshared, rehearsed, and reflected upon by the group.A/r/tographyA/r/tography is a form of qualitative, arts-based, living inquiry (Springgay, Irwinand Wilson Kind 2005) that encourages its participants to become engaged. Recentscholars have described arts production and presentation to be scholarly investigations and representations where new courses of action unfold due to “loss,shift or rupture” resulting in new ideas and information emerging (Springgay, Irwin,162 D. M. Pecaski McLennanWilson Kind 2005, 898). Loss, shift, and rupture allow a/r/tographers to become awareof the “third space,” a place where they can “re-[think], re-[live], and re-[make] theterms of their identities as they confront difference and similarity in apparently contradictory worlds” (Irwin 2004, 29; Rogoff 2000). A/r/tographic research provides anopportunity for the two domains of theatrical and educational research to be equallyexplored. The artistic knowledge is demonstrated in the artistic domain (sociodrama), whiletheoretical knowledge of educational theory (kindergarten pedagogy) is also explored(Piirto 2002).A/r/tographers immerse themselves in “a collection of ideas, information, and artifacts” to “imagine and form different relationships amongst people and ideas” (Irwin 2004,32). These interactions allow the a/r/tographer to delve deeply into the world of art, education, and research to explore the known, unknown, and imaginable. Creating art andeducation is not something that is done. It is lived experience. It is not rehearsal for orrepresentation of reality, but reality itself.Irwin (2004) states that a/r/tographers are continuously exploring how to collect,present, and represent educational inquiry. Questions and understandings are representedthrough texts and artwork in an effort to convey meaning and not facts about thea/r/tographer’s exploration. A/r/tography is a never-ending continuity of exploration.“Thought and action are inextricably linked, and through a hermeneutic circle of interpretation and understanding, new knowledge affects existing knowledge that in turn affectsthe freshly conceived existing knowledge” (Irwin 2004, 34). Because a/r/tography is living work, representing an a/r/tographer’s questions, practices, understandings, and textsis challenging. How can one best represent the meaning, and not the facts, behind thea/r/tographic exploration? This appears to be especially challenging for the dramatistsunless they are video/audio taped; dramatic moments disappear the moment they are conceived and acted upon, existing only in memory after the experience. Unlike visual artistswho have a piece of tangible artwork, dramatic moments have the potential to become lostor misrepresented. The quest becomes how these dramatic moments can be represented inan accessible way so that a nonobserver might still be able to imagine what happened inthe artistic activities.Much like a/r/tography (Finley 2005; Irwin 2004; Irwin and de Cosson 2004) seeksto “encourage audiences to define themselves not as passive spectators but rather as activeparticipants” (Finley 2005, 684), the sociodramatic theories of Boal (1985, 1995, 1998,2002, 2006) when used in educational environments seek to “create an educational culturethat empowers students” (Howard 2004, 217) by encouraging them to think critically, toanalyze their own social conditions, and to evaluate information presented to them relatedto their own power, identity, and representation (Howard 2004; Trend 1992). These educational “spaces” need to be experienced as “vibrant, living, creative spaces providingopportunities for dialogue and growth” (Haskell and Linds 2004, ¶ 12) that challenge bothstudents and teachers to transform their “taken-for-granted, naturalized understandings ofknowledge, teaching, and the school” (Pinar 2004, 23). These same educational contextsmay also be used to help facilitate caring and empathetic relationships between individuals existing and interacting with one another (Noddings 1996; Eisler and Levine 2002;Levine 2002) through exposure to and the repetitive experiencing of compassionate andaltruistic interactions among students. Noddings (1984, 1995, 1996, 1999) suggests thatone of the purposes of educational environments should be the creation and sustenanceof caring and arts-appreciating individuals. A/r/tography seeks to unite theory and practice as it “portrays the multidimensionality of human life” (Finley 2005, 683). Because“sociodrama can be adapted to any age group” (Zachariah and Moreno 2006, 161), “earlyInfluences in Children’s Sociodrama Explorations 163experiences literally provide the organizing framework for our brains” (Eisler and Levine2002, 18), and “the brain is malleable all throughout life, but much more so in the earlyyears” (Eisler and Levine 2002, 20), this study seeks to explore how sociodrama activitiesare experienced by senior kindergarten students.Research DesignInspired by a/r/tography (Irwin and de Cosson, 2004), eleven senior kindergarten students (six male and five female) and their teacher (Mrs. Greene) participated in twelvesociodramatic workshops. As the artist, researcher, and teacher leading this a/r/tographicstudy, my artistic inquiry occurred by observing students engaging within sociodrama andcreating various forms of collaborative and personal texts (Cole, Neilsen, Knowles, andLucian 2003; Eisner 1998; Felshin 1995; Piirto 2002). Two research questions guidedthe study: How do senior kindergarten children experience sociodrama activities? Whatthemes emerge from a four-week sociodrama workshop with senior kindergarten students?Inspired by a/r/tography, the sociodrama and text were interwoven to allow additionalor enhanced meanings and understandings from the sociodramatic workshops to emerge(Sinner 2002). In this study, the ongoing reflexive journaling was woven with observationsof the sociodrama workshops in an effort to artistically explore and represent the observedmoments within the dramas. This qualitative study was intended to explore the themesand issues that emerged from the implementation of the sociodrama into regular classroomprogramming. As the experienced artist, I worked in collaboration with Mrs. Greene byhelping to plan for and integrate sociodrama into the students’ schedule and by trainingher to lead the sociodramatic workshops. During each workshop, I acted as the nonparticipant observer, documenting the emerging themes from student explorations throughvarious artistic texts including transcripts of sessions, field notes, oral statements from students, interviews and personal correspondence with Mrs. Greene, and a reflexive journal.This qualitative data helped to shape my understanding of the students’ experiences fromthe workshops.Using modified activities inspired by the work of both Moreno (1943) and Boal (1985,1995, 1998, 2002, 2006)—including warm-up games and activities, main sociodrama roleplay and explorations, and concluding discussions and reflection periods—the childrenwere provided repeated opportunities to examine, enact, role-play, reenact, and reflect uponissues, themes, and ideas of personal and collective importance. This democratic approachdiffered from more traditional classroom problem-solving strategies, as the sociodramaticsessions were meant to provide students with a space that aided them in exploring topics oftheir choice, not preconceived ideas presented by myself as the researcher or Mrs. Greeneas the classroom teacher. This approach is quite unique to the atmosphere of standardsbased accountability that currently exists in many of today’s classrooms and does notalways consider or represent young children’s needs, abilities, or interests (Aina 1998;Aronson 2004; Diaz Soto and Swadener 2002; Garcia 1999; Grumet 1988; Intrator 2005;Noddings 1984, 1995).The Sociodramatic Workshops—Creating an Aesthetic of Kinder-CaringDue to the young age of the participants and their limited exposure to sociodramatic exercises and activities, the workshops were designed following steps so that students couldbecome familiar with and comfortable working in the dramatic art form. Prior artistic experiences and knowledge of the students were considered in the planning stage. Suggested164 D. M. Pecaski McLennanpicture books were used as a reference point for students to begin to explore social issuesor concerns that were observed by Mrs. Greene to be occurring in the classroom. In addition, multiple activities from Boal’s Aesthetics of the Oppressed (2006) were included inthe twelve workshops. These activities complement the sociodrama activities outlined inTheatre of the Oppressed (Boal, 1985) and are similar in nature to the learning-based playand art activities (for example, drawing, play dough sculpture, music) that are everydaycomponents of a kindergarten classroom in Ontario (Ministry of Education, 2006).Understanding the ProblemThe first step in our sociodrama sessions was to engage the children in warm-up activities tohelp them relax and encourage a feeling of cohesion and community within the classroom.Our warm-ups were based on Boal’s (2002) Games for Actors and Non-Actors. Activitiesfrom this book helped prepare students to engage in sociodrama by encouraging them toexperiment with physical movements and relations between people and objects. The gamelike nature was very similar to the types of activities within which they frequently engagedin their kindergarten classroom.Selecting the Focus of ExplorationThe next step was for children to engage in a group discussion to help them select thefocus of collaborative exploration in the remaining sociodramatic activities. Traditionally,it is the participants, and not the facilitator, that select the focus of exploration; however,this proved to be challenging for our group, and after consultation with Mrs. Greene, wedecided to facilitate the sharing of ideas by asking children to explore ideas they had readabout in familiar picture books during their read-aloud time. According to Eckloff (2006),using pictures and books as starting points for dramatic exploration is a viable way toinitiate sociodramatic action with children who are incapable of suggesting their own topics of exploration due to their varying ages or abilities. The books We Share Everything!(Munsch 1999), I Was So Mad (Mayer 1983), Corduroy (Freeman 1968), and Bunny Cakes(Wells 1997) were chosen in consultation with Mrs. Greene and explored many issues shehad observed the children struggling with during class time, including sharing with others,turn taking, feeling anger and disappointment, loneliness, losing something of importance,being understood, and sibling issues.Discussing the Chosen IssueOnce children had chosen and discussed the scenario for exploration, either as presentedin the original picture books or as evolved from a discussion following the reading, Mrs.Greene encouraged the children to engage in an in-depth analysis of the situation. Thishelped to clarify the context and details of the issue, so children would be able to recreatethe situation using role-playing in the subsequent steps of the workshop.Role-Playing the Initial Problem or ConflictAfter the discussion, Mrs. Greene asked children to volunteer as actors so the originalproblem situation could be role-played as it occurred. Only children who willingly volunteered were assigned a character, and nonactors were asked to serve as spectators on thecarpet area as the audience. Mrs. Greene helped prompt the dramatic action by focusingInfluences in Children’s Sociodrama Explorations 165children and reminding them of their roles and actions within the scene. Using deliberate prompting, she helped children to bring forth the issue through clear characterizationand dialogue between characters. With support, children role-played the initial problem orissue from the chosen story and discussion. Audience members had been encouraged toactively think about possible responses and resolutions to the dramatic action as the sceneoccurred.Sharing Ideas for How the Problem Can Be SolvedWhen the role-play had concluded, children gathered together as a whole group again.Using focused questioning, Mrs. Greene asked children to reflect upon what they hadobserved in the drama, how it made them feel, what it reminded them of, and how theythought the problem could be changed or solved. Children were encouraged to brainstormas many alternative responses to the original situation as possible, and these were scribedon a large piece of paper. Once all ideas had been recorded, children selected one to explorein their next role-play.Improvising the Modified SceneAt this point, children were asked to volunteer again as actors who would improvisean alternative response to the original scene. Often, the children required much supportthrough verbal prompting from Mrs. Greene, who coached them from alongside the scene.Often, as the action unfolded, children in the audience had ideas for how to further theaction and signaled this by raising their hands or standing to pause the drama. Once thescene had concluded, all students joined together on the communal carpet.Reflecting Upon the Dramatic ExperienceAt the conclusion of each session, Mrs. Greene invited children to engage in an oral, wholegroup discussion and reflection period that provided them an opportunity to share theirthoughts and feelings toward the events in the session. Mrs. Greene would help extractsignificant ideas and clarify children’s responses through the use of open-ended questionsthat aided in transporting them back into the dramatic moments.Extending the Dramatic ExperienceAs a way of deepening the actions within and reflections upon the sociodramatic work,Mrs. Green often integrated the ideas from the sessions into other areas of the classroom including focused artwork at her art center, the creation of classroom bulletin boarddisplays about a topic of exploration, and sharing information with families of the children.Student Experiences Within the SociodramaBy observing and interpreting the textual data that were collected, I was able to createa layered representation of the students’ experiences within the sociodrama workshopsin the form of student narratives. Doing so portrayed the individual and collective livedmoments and evolving artistic abilities within the drama. By the conclusion of the twelveworkshops, it was apparent to me that most of the senior kindergarten students were able todiscuss issues of personal importance within the whole-group format, improvise portrayals166 D. M. Pecaski McLennanof these issues using role-playing, brainstorm and then role-play alternative responses andsolutions to these problems, and reflect orally upon the experiences at the conclusion ofeach session. Additionally, students were observed by Mrs. Greene and me on repeatedoccasions to be:• Extending their artistic explorations and interactions into their free playtime outside of the workshops in the classroom, other areas of the school (e.g., gymnasium,library), and outside at recess time.• Creating personal artwork that showcased their discoveries and connections to othermembers of the school community and families.• Sharing information about their experiences in the sociodrama in personal communications with families outside of school time.• Using strategies from the sociodrama sessions when problem solving with peers inthe classroom.• Becoming more confident and capable in their artistic techniques and interactionswith one another.As student experience within the sociodrama workshops progressed, it was observedthat both student responses to and reflection upon the issues of exploration in all areasof the workshops (e.g., warm-ups, main activities, reflections) became more multifaceted.Students would build upon one another’s suggestions, resulting in more complex discussions and problem solving without repeating ideas from previous sessions. Students createdmore complex characters and engaged in deeper, richer explorations of the social issuesbeing explored in the scenarios. Personal and collective responses to the dramatized conflicts became more complex as students worked together to create more informed, intricateresponses and preventions to the problems. This change in thinking implied that studentswere continually analyzing the issues being explored and considering different responsesand behaviors to resolve issues or prevent them from occurring again. According to Boal,one of the purposes of interactive theatre, such as the sociodrama sessions experiencedby students, is to “encourage autonomous activity, to set a process in motion, to stimulatetransformative creativity, to change spectators into protagonists” (2002, 275). I believe thisprocess was evident in the students’ involvement within the sociodrama by the conclusionof the study.Influencing Student Experiences Within the SociodramaSociodrama naturally exists as a spontaneous, realistic learning activity as it consistentlyexplores issues that always reflect the interests of the participants (Eckloff 2006). It is atruly aesthetic activity in the sense that participants have total power and control over everyaspect of the experience: choosing a topic to explore, role-playing the conflict, exploringalternative responses to the conflict, and discussing and reflecting upon the experienceswithin the drama. After examining and reflecting upon the data in this study, one of themost interesting observations for me was that although the young students appeared verycapable of working within the sociodramatic format and evolving as exploratory artistswith each successive workshop, their explorations did not appear to be as pure in authenticity as true sociodrama aspires to be. It appeared as though influences beyond the students’control indirectly influenced the shape and scope of their dramatic explorations. The threeexternal influences I have identified are the school environment, the classroom teacher, andthe students themselves. These three influences appeared to limit and control the depth ofexploration and true authenticity of the spirit of the students’ sociodrama.Influences in Children’s Sociodrama Explorations 167The School EnvironmentAs each sociodrama workshop progressed, students appeared to become more fluid in theirdialogue and interactions with one another, indicating that a gradual increase in theirinvolvement and commitment to the social exploration was occurring. However, manyenvironmental factors may have influenced or hindered the spontaneity of student actionsor the ways in which these explorations were experienced and internalized. The physicalenvironment of the classroom, established expectations for student behavior and participation, and outside classroom interruptions all may have influenced the interactions ofstudents within the sociodramatic activities.According to Warren (1993), facilitators must ensure a psychologically safe spaceexists for participants before active, collaborative, and meaningful participation in dramacan take place. In addition, the space should be physically inviting, warm, well lit, andlarge enough to allow participants freedom in their movements and interactions with oneanother (Way, 1967). Participants must feel that they are provided a safe outlet for risktaking in their personal explorations and that they are free from shame, embarrassment,or vulnerability. Taylor (1994) suggests that young children especially need to feel comfortable and secure in their immediate environment to participate fully and successfully indramatic activities. This “infinite space” (Boal 2002, 162) is full of endless possibility forexploration, discussion, and reflection because it does not physically or psychologicallylimit participant engagement. It encourages a high level of comfort and trust within participants, enabling them to freely explore issues, feelings, and unfamiliar situations (Blum1999; Pecaski McLennan and Smith 2007; Way 1967). In this space, participants’ ideasare respected. The sociodrama facilitator should be flexible and attempt to implement allsuggestions in activities and discussion, allowing the direction of the sociodrama to ebband flow with the expressed needs and desires of participants. The context within whichthe sociodrama occurs plays a critical role in facilitating and constraining the freedom ofparticipant exploration.A crowded classroom environment. The senior kindergarten classroom in this studywas a clean, bright, lively place, filled with colorful toys and learning materials. A wallfull of windows allowed the outside light to filter through, illuminating the student artwork that decorated each wall. Many calendars, times, and pictures were displayed onbulletin boards, reminding students of their daily schedule and what activities took placeand where. Dozens of bins full of learning materials lined shelves around the room, eachmarked with real-life pictures of the contents, helping students to keep materials organizedand in the right spot. In the center of the room, was the “learning” carpet, where studentsgathered at the beginning and ending of their school day, engaging in curriculum-drivenlessons or reading stories and engaging in discussion together. Dotted around the roomwere small tables and chairs, each set having a specific purpose for student activity time(for example, language table, snack table, small toy table). A large sign, welcoming visitors to the senior kindergarten classroom, hung on the classroom door. Scattered aroundit were pictures of the children in action throughout the year: posing in front of the playground equipment, participating in special assemblies, playing in activity centers in theirclassroom.Although the classroom was warm and bright, it was a very small environmentthat was overflowing with materials. The walls were almost dizzying in the sense thatevery inch of space was covered with posters, classroom instructions, or student artwork. Students participated in each workshop by using the large, communal learning168 D. M. Pecaski McLennancarpet that was adjacent to the main classroom wall. This space was used for our workshops, as there was no other open space in the room large enough to permit students theroom they needed for the sociodrama activities. Other spaces in the school were originally considered but not used, because Mrs. Greene and I wanted students to be secludedfrom outsiders who may have influenced the drama or caused anxiety in students duringworkshops.The limited space in which workshops were conducted may have hindered the possibility of dramatic exploration, as students appeared crowded throughout activities. Duringwarm-up exercises that required participants to engage in large, bold movements, it wasnoted that students often appeared limited to walking around the many tables and chairsin the room, resulting in them bumping into one another or needing to pause and wait forothers to move out of the way before proceeding. Main role-play took place in the borderbetween the carpet and tables and chairs. Audience members sat on the carpet while actorscrammed into the confined area that was created by moving the tables and chairs against thefurthest classroom wall. This small space may have hindered some of the possibilities forcreation in which students might have engaged had they more room to explore the area incharacter. Although the purpose for remaining in the classroom was to encourage comfortand trust among students while discouraging outside interruptions, staging the workshopsin a larger space (e.g., gym or library) might have encouraged more freedom in movementsor levels of participation.Established classroom rules and routines. There are often rigid and invisible expectations in place in schools that limit the range of student expression and experience duringclass time (de Cosson et al. 2003). Hidden communication systems (Grumet 1998) portraysubliminal messages and symbols repeatedly to students through a teacher’s (in)actions,the physical arrangement of the classroom environment, and the established systems ofrules and responsibilities built into the educational program. Often, there are hidden powerstructures in the classroom, as expressed through this hidden curriculum (Apple 1982),and the underlying expectations and rules outlined by the teacher can hinder free expression and spontaneity by students in aesthetic explorations. Much like a crowded classroom,established classroom rules and procedures may influence the level of spontaneity andengagement students experience during aesthetic exploration.In this study, it was noted repeatedly that Mrs. Greene had very clear expectationsfor behavior and classroom procedures and that students appeared to automatically engageand function within these parameters from the moment they entered the classroom. Aswell, Mrs. Greene had taught the majority of these students junior kindergarten in theprevious year, resulting in this being their second year together. I metaphorically compared this classroom to a well-oiled machine in field notes and reflexive journal entries,as the classroom often seemed to run itself (Pecaski McLennan, 2007). Students wereso proficient at following what appeared to be very clearly established expectations androutines. Specifically, students were always expected to raise their hands and be calledupon by Mrs. Greene before speaking, to sit cross-legged on the carpet when attending to others, not to call out ideas spontaneously, to take turns with one another, to befocused on attending to whatever was happening at the particular “teachable” moment,and to keep classroom objects and materials in their rightful places at all times. Often,when a student was not following these rules and ro
